PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 12, 2015
Every Child Counts Act
Amends the school improvement program under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to allow states to establish alternate academic achievement standards and assessments for students who have the most significant cognitive disabilities.
Requires the alternate standards to meet certain conditions, including that they:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
are aligned with the state's challenging academic content and achievement standards;
provide access to the general curriculum for the grade in which the student is enrolled; and
establish, at a minimum, two levels of achievement (on-target and advanced) that indicate that a student meets or exceeds the state's proficient level of academic achievement; and
establish, at a minimum, a third level of achievement (catch-up) that provides information about a student's progress toward proficiency.
Requires each state using alternate assessments to ensure that: (1) not more than 1% of the total number of all students in each grade level in the state who are assessed in a subject are assessed using the alternate assessments, (2) the state's regular academic assessments remain accessible to all students, and (3) the alternate assessments are peer reviewed and based on the best available evidence.
Allows each state to count students who are determined to be proficient using such alternate assessments in its determination of the percentage of the state's students who are meeting or exceeding the state's academic content and achievement standards.
Requires states' annual report cards to: (1) include the number and percentage of disabled students who take the alternate assessments; and (2) break that information down by grade, subject matter, and disability type.
People & committees
Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.516 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.516 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.516 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.516 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.